Something that I picked up recently and made me think.
We all make decision and commitments, big and small in our lives: making investments (i.e. education, funds, shares...), buying a car or house, getting married (or not), having kids and raising them, going on vacation around the world, investing in education, pursuing a hobby, ...
We take into account circumstances, available assets, and arrive at a decision in line with our believes and objectives. If needed, we get others' consent or/and support.
At work, non of this seems to matter anymore: We don't seem to function like the capable and self-organising adults we're in private. We don't trust one another to figure things out within agreed context and contribute effectively to get us all to our goals. We take much less responsibility, since there is a manager to call the shots, take the responsibility, blame and glory.
Conversely, organisation tell people what to do, top down. Or worse, they tell them even how to do things - long after they became experts in their field.
You'll hear then "Trust the process", "this is standard practice ", = aka don't question and "do as you're asked/told". (see Forbes article "Command-and-Control Management is for Dinosaurs" for more examples)
Hierarchical decision making may seem like the fastest path to move forward. But when decision makers are too far from reality, good calls are matter of luck more than anything else. Results are often a lot of output, and less outcome.
Picture this: A sports car that you steer from afar (i.e. like a drone). You sit in a control tower with a joystick at a dashboard. You can see the car in the distance standing on the track.
Lights turn green and you hit the accelerator hard (decision made!). You get fast output instantly: super fast spinning wheels, lots of noise, burning rubber, … but the ground you cover is much less impressive.
Because you are not inside the car with your butt millimetres from the tarmac, you don't get an instant feedback for traction, grip, road temperature around you etc. Vital info for optimal propulsion.
And your real-time, remote dashboard adds latency: you're reactions will be too late and not fine-tuned to the situation ...
Same in business. Decision from a top-down distance are suboptimal at best. They kill speed and inhibit innovation. New ideas have a long and tough uphill battle to fight.
Since the industrial revolution (150+ years ago) 99.9% of businesses follow this approach. Virtually nothing has changed. With extremely few, albeit successful, exceptions.
A better way is to give more autonomy to the people closest to the matter and with the relevant expertise (i.e. customer, supplier, programme/code, production …). They can make better instant decisions to achieve better outcomes within given boundaries.
For both, better outcomes and a more human, modern organisation, more autonomy is needed. Done right, it leads to better results sooner with less effort.
Of course, autonomy comes with more accountability and higher commitment. This might not be for everyone and attracts different people. Often, the more capable, disillusioned and independently working ones.
The above, roughly, is what "teal" organisations are about. A term coined by Frederic Laloux.
It's an organisation that replaces hierarchy with self-management. Such organisations are considered living entities that strive towards maximising output and attaining their full potential.
Note: Self-management is not about everyone being equal. Nor is it about everyone deciding what they want, when they want. It is a more dynamic and flexible form of leadership and decision making, where persons with most expertise, and/or energy/availability take charge to complete a given task.
If this or similar topics interest you and you would like to discuss this in more detail, feel free to reach out to me.
Max
We all make decision and commitments, big and small in our lives: making investments (i.e. education, funds, shares...), buying a car or house, getting married (or not), having kids and raising them, going on vacation around the world, investing in education, pursuing a hobby, ...
We take into account circumstances, available assets, and arrive at a decision in line with our believes and objectives. If needed, we get others' consent or/and support.
At work, non of this seems to matter anymore: We don't seem to function like the capable and self-organising adults we're in private. We don't trust one another to figure things out within agreed context and contribute effectively to get us all to our goals. We take much less responsibility, since there is a manager to call the shots, take the responsibility, blame and glory.
Conversely, organisation tell people what to do, top down. Or worse, they tell them even how to do things - long after they became experts in their field.
You'll hear then "Trust the process", "this is standard practice ", = aka don't question and "do as you're asked/told". (see Forbes article "Command-and-Control Management is for Dinosaurs" for more examples)
Hierarchical decision making may seem like the fastest path to move forward. But when decision makers are too far from reality, good calls are matter of luck more than anything else. Results are often a lot of output, and less outcome.
Picture this: A sports car that you steer from afar (i.e. like a drone). You sit in a control tower with a joystick at a dashboard. You can see the car in the distance standing on the track.
Lights turn green and you hit the accelerator hard (decision made!). You get fast output instantly: super fast spinning wheels, lots of noise, burning rubber, … but the ground you cover is much less impressive.
Because you are not inside the car with your butt millimetres from the tarmac, you don't get an instant feedback for traction, grip, road temperature around you etc. Vital info for optimal propulsion.
And your real-time, remote dashboard adds latency: you're reactions will be too late and not fine-tuned to the situation ...
Same in business. Decision from a top-down distance are suboptimal at best. They kill speed and inhibit innovation. New ideas have a long and tough uphill battle to fight.
Since the industrial revolution (150+ years ago) 99.9% of businesses follow this approach. Virtually nothing has changed. With extremely few, albeit successful, exceptions.
A better way is to give more autonomy to the people closest to the matter and with the relevant expertise (i.e. customer, supplier, programme/code, production …). They can make better instant decisions to achieve better outcomes within given boundaries.
For both, better outcomes and a more human, modern organisation, more autonomy is needed. Done right, it leads to better results sooner with less effort.
Of course, autonomy comes with more accountability and higher commitment. This might not be for everyone and attracts different people. Often, the more capable, disillusioned and independently working ones.
The above, roughly, is what "teal" organisations are about. A term coined by Frederic Laloux.
It's an organisation that replaces hierarchy with self-management. Such organisations are considered living entities that strive towards maximising output and attaining their full potential.
Note: Self-management is not about everyone being equal. Nor is it about everyone deciding what they want, when they want. It is a more dynamic and flexible form of leadership and decision making, where persons with most expertise, and/or energy/availability take charge to complete a given task.
If this or similar topics interest you and you would like to discuss this in more detail, feel free to reach out to me.
Max